CORE Meeting: October 16, 2013 Narayan Das, Rabeya Yasmin, Jinnat Ara, Md. Kamruzzaman BRAC Peter Davis Social Development Research Institute Julia Behrman, Agnes Quisumbing, Shalini Roy International Food Policy Research Institute How do intrahousehold dynamics change when assets are transferred to women? Evidence from BRAC’s “Targeting the Ultra Poor” Program in Bangladesh
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
– CFPR-TUP significantly increased household ownership of other assets as well
• Agricultural & non-agricultural productive assets; consumer durables; land
– However, these mostly translated to increased sole ownership by men
– Women did experience increases in rights to use some of these assets – which they perceived as increasing their social capital
• e.g., access to consumer durables (such as suitable clothing) – no longer ashamed of their appearance
– Suggests that when beneficiary households mobilized resources to acquire new assets (rather than directly transferred), these were typically owned solely by men
Key findings
Key findings
Men’s ownership of ag prod assets generally increased more than women’s
Treatment impact on number of [AGRICULTURAL ASSET]
Men’s ownership of land generally increased more than women’s
Treatment impact on area of [LAND]
Owned total in
HH
Owned
solely by
female
Owned in any
part by female
Owned
solely by
male
Owned jointly
by male and
female
Homestead land 0.539*** 0.060 0.108 0.420*** 0.028*
(0.120) (0.053) (0.072) (0.092) (0.016)
Cultivable land 0.542** 0.134* 0.072 0.519*** -0.001
(0.217) (0.071) (0.140) (0.149) (0.006)
Pond 0.084*** 0.007* 0.031*** 0.053*** 0.002
(0.021) (0.004) (0.012) (0.015) (0.002)
3. Women’s workload and mobility:
– CFPR-TUP did not increase the proportion of women working but did shift work from outside the home to inside the home
• Consistent with transferred assets requiring maintenance at home
– Women reported increased workloads – which combined to reduce mobility outside the home
– However, women also reported preferring reduced mobility to facing the stigma of working outside the home
Key findings
Key findings
Women’s work is shifted inside the home
Treatment impact on:
Whether the main female works0.009
(0.015)
Whether the main female works inside the home0.167***
(0.024)
Whether the main female works outside the home-0.080***
(0.017)
4. Women’s decision-making power:
– CFPR-TUP decreased women’s voice in a range of decisions
• Women’s decision-making over their own income, purchases for themselves, and household budgeting was significantly reduced
• Men’s voice in household decisions was significantly increased
• Consistent with women’s reduced mobility, leading to reduced access to markets
Key findings
Key findings
Women’s control over their own income is decreased
Treatment impact on whether the main female works and
Keeps all of the income earned-0.077***
(0.015)
Keeps any of the income earned-0.044**
(0.019)
Keeps none of the income earned0.053***
(0.014)
Key findings
Women’s control over purchases is decreased
Treatment impact on whether the woman herself
controls the money needed to buy…
Food from the market -0.151***
(0.017)
Clothes for herself -0.120***
(0.018)
Medicine for herself -0.153***
(0.017)
Cosmetics for herself -0.068***
(0.019)
Key findingsWomen’s voice in household saving/spending decisions is decreased, while husband’s sole voice is increased
Treatment impact on whether [WHO DECIDES] [DECISION]
She solely decides
She has any voice in deciding
Her husband solely decides
She and her husband jointly decide
How much to save -0.106*** -0.000 0.002 0.123***
(0.015) (0.008) (0.008) (0.016)
How much to spend on…
Food -0.130*** -0.030** 0.030** 0.098***
(0.015) (0.015) (0.015) (0.016)
Housing -0.126*** -0.050*** 0.050*** 0.078***
(0.014) (0.015) (0.015) (0.016)
Health care -0.124*** -0.051*** 0.051*** 0.079***
(0.014) (0.015) (0.015) (0.016)
Summary of key findings:
– CFPR-TUP increased asset ownership at household level
– In terms of “tangibles,” mixed effects on targeted women :
• Increased women’s ownership and control over transferred livestock
• However, greater increase in men’s sole ownership over other forms of new investment in assets
• Reduced women’s mobility outside the home due to transferred asset requiring maintenance inside the homestead
• Reduced women’s voice in a range of decisions
Conclusions and implications
Summary of key findings:
– However, taking into account “intangibles” and context, effects on targeted women appear more favorable (if still mixed) :
• Women’s social capital increased (access to better clothing, etc)
• Given sociocultural stigma of working outside home, women preferred working at home even with reduced mobility
• Women themselves framed project impacts more in terms of intangibles (self-esteem, satisfaction in contributing to household and children’s well-being, etc) than individual rights or material gains
Conclusions and implications
Take-aways:
– Asset transfers targeted to women can increase women’s ownership/control over the transferred asset
– May not necessarily increase women’s overall control over resources or bargaining position in the household
– If the transferred assets require maintenance at home, targeting them to women may shift women’s work inside the home
– Desirability of working inside the home may depend on local context – but may reduce decision making power over use of resources
Conclusions and implications
Take-aways:
– Nuance required in assessing whether interventions improve “women’s empowerment”
• Even if a program’s “household-level” impacts are unambiguously positive, effects for individuals within the household may be mixed
• Some outcomes valued by individuals may be “intangible,” and some that seem negative from a “Western” viewpoint may be favorable in the local context
• However, if increasing women’s asset ownership and decision-making power are explicit goals, a targeted asset transfer may not be sufficient – local sociocultural norms may themselves need to be changed